this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2024

513 points (98.9% liked)

News

23311 readers

3578 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil

Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.

2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.

Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.

3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.

Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.

4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.

Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.

5. Only recent news is allowed.

Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.

6. All posts must be news articles.

No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.

7. No duplicate posts.

If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.

8. Misinformation is prohibited.

Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.

9. No link shorteners.

The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.

10. Don't copy entire article in your post body

For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

513

As bans spread, fluoride in drinking water divides communities across the US (kffhealthnews.org)

submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

371 comments fedilink hide all child comments

…

It is a scenario playing out nationwide. From Oregon to Pennsylvania, hundreds of communities have in recent years either stopped adding fluoride to their water supplies or voted to prevent its addition. Supporters of such bans argue that people should be given the freedom of choice. The broad availability of over-the-counter dental products containing the mineral makes it no longer necessary to add to public water supplies, they say. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that while store-bought products reduce tooth decay, the greatest protection comes when they are used in combination with water fluoridation.

The outcome of an ongoing federal case in California could force the Environmental Protection Agency to create a rule regulating or banning the use of fluoride in drinking water nationwide. In the meantime, the trend is raising alarm bells for public health researchers who worry that, much like vaccines, fluoride may have become a victim of its own success.

The CDC maintains that community water fluoridation is not only safe and effective but also yields significant cost savings in dental treatment. Public health officials say removing fluoride could be particularly harmful to low-income families — for whom drinking water may be the only source of preventive dental care.

“If you have to go out and get care on your own, it’s a whole different ballgame,” said Myron Allukian Jr., a dentist and past president of the American Public Health Association. Millions of people have lived with fluoridated water for years, “and we’ve had no major health problems,” he said. “It’s much easier to prevent a disease than to treat it.”

According to the anti-fluoride group Fluoride Action Network, since 2010, over 240 communities around the world have removed fluoride from their drinking water or decided not to add it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 50 points 7 months ago (16 children)

Have you ever been wrong? If so, there's no reason to consider to your comment because your input is irrelevant.

It is possible to be a good source of information that has come to the wrong conclusion using the best information provided. As long as you update your conclusions as more information becomes available, no harm no foul.

[+] [email protected] -37 points 7 months ago (14 children)

You shouldn't trust me just because I said something, yes.

You should understand what's being said yourself so it doesn't matter who is saying it.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 7 months ago (5 children)

No that is not how expertise works. You cannot be an expert at everything: there's not enough time for one and not everyone is even capable for two. In fact, most people are decidedly NOT capable of being experts about MOST things. If someone spends their life working in an area (not watching YouTube videos about it), their perspective in that area is BETTER and is more worthy of consideration. A consensus among experts prevents any one individual from taking advantage of a situation and is even more worthy of consideration.

[+] [email protected] -30 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

The thing is, copying experts does not mean you understand the subject.

Lots of people think that just because they cite someone with more credentials than them, then that person must be correct. That's not how the real world works and you'll understand it more as you get older.

If you just trust people based on their credentials, then you're treating science like a religion and shouldn't be taken seriously by rational people. You do this because it's easier than understanding the science yourself.

This means you will be taken seriously by average people since rationality is on the decline.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Lol shut up I have two kids, a PhD and almost 20 years experience running a university research lab BEFORE my current job.

You don't have to understand that low dose fluoride is good for your teeth for it to be true. You don't have to understand that vaccines improve community health, or that getting enough movement throughout the day is good for heart health, or that eclipses don't cause electromagnetic anomalies for those things to be true either.

Planning to trust yourself more then experts in a field is naive to the point of being delusional. Especially if you're thinking you can go read a paper or two and "understand" it enough to be an intellectual peer of someone who actually invested years of time. No matter who you are, even if you're Einstein reincarnated, you're not that smart.

You don't have to listen blindly to every person, but listening to the consensus of people who know more than you isn't religion, it's a heuristic for making better decisions.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago

I cite them not because they’re going to be correct, but because all things considered they’re more likely to be able to draw the correct conclusions from the data than me or the person I’m talking to.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (10 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)